Patna High Court
Rameshwar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to petitioners Bechani Devi and Sunita Kumari subject to a bond and the conditions of Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S.
Summary
The petitioners Bechani Devi and Sunita Kumari, mother and sister of alleged co‑accused Anil Kumar Yadav, applied for anticipatory bail in a case registered under IPC sections 341, 323, 504, 34 and POCSO Act sections 4 and 6. The informant alleged that Anil Yadav pretended marriage, demanded a Rs 5 lakh dowry, assaulted her and caused a pregnancy. The petitioners contended that they were implicated only because of their family relationship, have clean antecedents and were not named in the victim’s statement. The State opposed the bail. The court, finding no direct allegation against the petitioners, ordered anticipatory bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties and subject to conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S., and disposed the application.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to family members of a co‑accused when no specific allegation is made against them
- Whether the conditions prescribed under Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S. are applicable in granting such bail
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 34, 341, 504
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 4, 6
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- POCSO
- dowry demand
- assault
- family members
- clean antecedent
- CrPC
- Indian Penal Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91085 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-224 Year-2023 Thana- LAUKAHA District- Madhubani
======================================================
1. Rameshwar Yadav S/o Jaharu Yadav R/o Village - Rampur, P.S - Laukaha,
District - Madhubani
2. Bechani Devi W/o Rameshwar Yadav R/o Village - Rampur, P.S - Laukaha,
District - Madhubani
3. Rampait Yadav @ Rampreet Yadav S/o Rameshwar Yadav R/o Village -
Rampur, P.S - Laukaha, District - Madhubani
4. Shiv Kumari W/o Rampreet Yadav @ Rampait Yadav R/o Village - Rampur,
P.S - Laukaha, District - Madhubani
5. Sunita Kumari @ Rinki Kumari @ Sunita Devi D/o Rameshwar Yadav R/o
Village - Rampur, P.S - Laukaha, District - Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. X D/o Sanjay Yadav R/o Village - Aarnama, P.S. - Laukaha, Dist. -
Madhubani.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Jitendra Kumar Bharti
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Mithlesh Kumar Khare
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
6 08-07-2026 Earlier, vide order dated 16.01.2026, this bail
application already stood dismissed as withdrawn in respect of
petitioner nos. 1, 3 and 4.
Re: Petitioner no. 2 & 5
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
3. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 504, 34 of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91085 of 2025(6) dt.08-07-2026
2/3
the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act.
4. Informant alleged that co-accused Anil Kumar
Yadav established physical relation with her on pretext of
marriage, on account of which, she became pregnant and when
informant & other family members requested before the family
members of co-accused Anil to solemnize marriage, they
demanded Rs. 5 lakhs, as dowry, and when informant protested,
she was abused & assaulted and also threatened.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner no. 2 Bechani Devi is mother and petitioner no. 5
Sunita Kumar is unmarried sister of co-accused Anil Yadav.
Specific accusation is against co-accused Anil Yadav. So far as
these petitioners are concerned, they have been made accused
merely because they happen to be family members of co-
accused Anil Yadav. The victim, in her statement recorded under
Section 164 Cr.P.C., has not alleged anything wrong against
these petitioners. Petitioners are ladies and claim clean
antecedent.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
let petitioner nos. 2 & 5 namely Bechani Devi and Sunita
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91085 of 2025(6) dt.08-07-2026
3/3
Kumari, in the event of their arrest/surrender within a period of
eight weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-
bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive
Special Judge POCSO cum District & Addl. Sessions Judge –
VII, Madhubani in connection with Laukaha P.S. Case No. 224
of 2023, subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2)
of the Cr.P.C. / Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
8. This application is, accordingly, disposed of.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
anay
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.